Interdisciplinary synergies in comparative research on constitutional judicial decision-making

Theunis Roux

doi:10.5771/0506-7286-2019-4-413

Contents
- Chapter Expand | CollapseAuthorsPage
- 411–412 Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis 411–412
- 413–503 Abhandlungen / Articles 413–503
  - 413–438 Interdisciplinary synergies in comparative research on constitutional judicial decision-making Theunis Roux Theunis Roux 413–438
  - 439–462 A New Era of Customary Property Rights? – Liberia’s Land and Forest Legislation in Light of the Indigenous Right to Self-Determination Ricarda Rösch Ricarda Rösch 439–462
  - 463–482 Brazilian Anti-Corruption Structure: Normative Systematization and Institutional Coordination Issues Carlos Ragazzo, Fernanda Freitas Carlos Ragazzo, Fernanda Freitas 463–482
  - 483–503 From administrative to constitutional bodies – The fourth branch of government: Towards the constitutionalization of independent specialized national institutions in Cameroon Justin Ngambu Wanki Justin Ngambu Wanki 483–503
- 504–527 Berichte / Reports 504–527
  - Preventive Powers of Police in Namibia – A Rights-Based Approach Clemens Arzt Clemens Arzt
- 528–531 Buchbesprechungen / Book Reviews 528–531
  - Günter Frankenberg, Comparative Law as Critique (Philipp Dann)
- 532–543 Bibliographie / Bibliography 532–543
  - 532–532 RECHT UND ENTWICKLUNG ALLGEMEIN / LAW AND DEVELOPMENT IN GENERAL 532–532
  - 532–535 AFRIKA / AFRICA 532–535
  - 535–538 ASIEN / ASIA 535–538
  - 539–540 LATEINAMERIKA / LATIN AMERICA 539–540
  - 540–543 NAHER UND MITTLERER OSTEN / NEAR AND MIDDLE EAST 540–543
- 544–544 Call for Papers 544–544
- 545–545 Impressum 545–545
Durchsuchen Sie das Werk
Geben Sie ein Keyword in die Suchleiste ein
Access

VRÜ Verfassung und Recht in Übersee , page 413 - 438

Interdisciplinary synergies in comparative research on constitutional judicial decision-making

Autoren

Theunis Roux

DOI
- doi.org/10.5771/0506-7286-2019-4-413
- ISSN: 0506-7286
- ISSN online: 2941-9603
Abstract

Interdisciplinary research in comparative constitutional law and politics is often talked about but rarely theorized or practised. And yet, such research is urgently required to meet the complex problems posed by the rise of populist constitutionalism and the endurance of other forms of authoritarian governance. Against this background, this article examines the potential for productive interdisciplinary dialogue between positive political science and legal-doctrinal and normative approaches to constitutional judicial decision-making. While research in this area is founded on a wide range of epistemologies and methods, the article argues, there are at least two areas in which interdisciplinary dialogue might both promote more rigorous research and deliver practical benefits. The first involves greater use of quantitative social science methods in comparative doctrinal research; and the second, the mutual challenging of settled assumptions as between normative constitutional theorists and positive political scientists involved in comparative research on (1) the determinants of judicial behaviour and (2) the link between constitutional judicial decision-making and various non-case outcomes
Share